Environmental Impact Analysis: Philosophy and Methods. INSTITUTION Wisconsin Univ., Madison
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DOCUMENT RESUME ED 070 640 SE 015 317 AUTHOR Ditton, Robert B.; Goodale, Thomas L. TITLE Environmental Impact Analysis: Philosophy and Methods. INSTITUTION Wisconsin Univ., Madison. Sea Grant Program. REPORT NO WIS-SG-72-111 PUB DATE 72 NOTE 165p.; Proceedings of the Conference on Environmental Impact Analysis, Green Bay, Wisconsin, January 4-5, 1972 AVAILABLE FROM Sea Grant Publications Office, 1225 West Dayton Street, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin 51706 EDRS PRICE MF-$0.65 HC-$6.58 DESCRIPTORS *Comparative Analysis; *Conference Reports; *Environmental Criteria; Environmental Influences; Evaluation; *Federal Legislation; Methods; *Quality Control; Standards ABSTRACT Proceedings of the Conference on Environmental Impact Analysis held in Green Bay, Wisconsin, January 4-5,1972, are compiled in this report. The conference served as a forum for exchange of information among State and Federal agencies and educators on experiences with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1970. Hopefully, results of the conference will be manifested in improved conception and analysis of public works projects. The 16 major presentations dealt with several areas of concern: impact of the National Environmental Policy Act; how the Act has been implementedandsome of the problems arising from it in the past two years; environmental impact perspectives exemplified by a systems approach to governmental decision-making and the total institution-wide emphasis on man and his environment by the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay; impact assessment dimensions as conceptualization, communication, social aspects, and the application ofmathematics; and procedures and programs for environmental impact assessment. Text of the Act appears in the appendix together with various aspects of impact statements--preparation process, sources for, summary of those already filed, and Federal agency contactE. (BL) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: PH I LOSOPHY &METHODS S 1/11.Ali t.AIS01 Al III I DM A t105 %%II, AR I Of i III Of t DM A t itlti . FILMED FRONT BEST AVAILABLE COPY edited by robert b. ditton and thomas I. goodale t , I 4 2 Sea Grant publication WIS-SG-72.111 cz) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: cp PHILOSOPHY & METHODS C Edited by Robert B. Ditton and Thomas L. Goodale Proceedings of the Conference on Environmental Impact Analysis Green Bay, Wisconsin January 4-5,1972 SPONSORED BY UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SEA GRANT PROGRAM UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-EXTENSION UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-GREEN BAY Published by University of Wisconsin Sea Grant Program, part of the National Sea Grant Program, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminiorat ion US. Department of Commerce Sea Grant Publications Office 1225 West Dayton Street University of Wisconsin Madison, Wisconsin 53706 (608) 263.3255 FOREWORD The National Environmental Policy Act of 1970 has among its purposes: "To declare a national policy which will encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between man and his environment; to promote efforts which will pre- vent and eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere and stimulate the health and welfare of man; to enrich the understanding of the ecological systems and national resources importance to the nation; . ." Since this Act initiates substantial changes in our Nation's environmental goals, its implementations have created numerous certainties and problems.The conference served as a forum for exchange of information among State and Federal agencies and educators on experiences with the Environmental Policy Act. The results of the conference will be manifest in improved conception and analysis of public works penjects. This conference was supported by University of Wisconsin-Extension, UW-Green Bay. and the UW-Sea Grant Program. The University of Wisconsin's Sea Grant Program is a part of the National Sea Grant Program, which is maintained by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration of the U. S. Department of Commerce. Professors Robert B. Ditton and Thomas L. Goodale of the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay have performed an important service in organizing a timely effort to discuss an important national goal in the formative stages of its implementation. MARVIN T. BEATTY Chairman Environmental Resources Unit University of Wisconsin-Extension GREGORY D. REDDEN Director of University Extension Sea Grant Program ROLLIN B. POSEY Dean School of Professional Studies University of Wisconsin-Green Bay ACKNOWLEDGMENTS It's a bit presumptuous to list ourselves as editors of this report. We do that only to establish accountability for whatever errors and inconveniences encountered by the agencies and individuals who participated in this undertaking. Whatever credit is due must be attributed to the conference participants. We have listed them in the Appendix. The papers included here are much as they were when presented at the conference. Revisions, if any, were mincr. Most of the discussion that took place was intentionally not recorded.We chose not to include in the report the portions that were recorded. The print media seems Coo cool to capture the tone, or even the essence, of the discussion. Extensive editing seems to warp the context, and suggests formality neither obtained nor desired. We wish to acknowledge the contributions of many others who made the conference and this report possible. They are: Mary Beatty, Ione Brown, and Ernest Ehrbar, all of University Extension and to Greg Hedden, Director of Advisory Services, University of Wisconsin Sea Grant Program, for their active support of the entire program; Mrs. Evelyn Farrell for handling many of the conference details including conference registration; Mesdames Jean Brien, Joy Phillips and Hope Mercier, our secretaries, for translating unintelligible and badly-rushed notes and requests into what- ever orderliness was obtained. Mrs. Phillips typed the final copy of the entire report. Linda Weimer of the Sea Grant Program pushed the report through production in record time. The conference and report belong to these people and to those who participated in the proceedings.We hope not to have done too much violence to their talents and goodwill since they are so important to our environment. R.B.D. T.L.G. TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Page THE IMPACT OF THE NATIO;;AL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT Chapter 1. NEPA: BUCKLE DOWN OR BUCKLE UNDER? Thomas L. Goodale 1 2. THE MAKING OF ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY: THE FIRST TWO YEARS John Stetnhart 5 3. CEQ AND ITS ROLF IN ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY Thomas C. Winter 23 4. SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF SEE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROGRAM Neil Orloff 29 TWO YEARS OF LABOR AND LEARNING 5. THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION John J. Kessler 45 6. THE U. S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS Donald E. Lawyer 53 OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PERSPECTIVES 7. UWGB: ITS ENVIPJNMENTAL FOCUS AND IMPACT Edward Weidner 61 8. A SYSTEMS APPROACH TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT John Armstrong 65 vii 7 Chapter Page SOME IMPACT ASSESSMENT DIMENSIONS 9. CONCEPTUALIZING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Paul Sager 79 10. COMUNICATING IN IMPACT ANALYSIS Robert S. Cook 83 11. SOCIAL ASPECTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Per K. Johnson 87 12. SOME THOUGHTS ON IMPACT STATEMENTS AND MATHEMATICS Eugene Robkin 91 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 13. SOME PROCEDURES AND PROGRAMS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESS1ENT Jens C. Sorenson 97 14. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT THROUGH A COMPUTER MODELLING PROCESS Thomas M. Krauskopf Dennis C. Bunde 107 15. THE QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT David Jowett 127 CONCLUDING REMARKS 16. NEPA: BUCKLING DOWN Robert B. Ditton 139 APPENDICES A. PL 91-190. National Environmental Policy Act . 145 B. "20 Questions and Answers Explaining the NEPA Section 102 Environmental Impact Stet/a:lent Process" 153 C. Sources for Environmental Impact Statements . 158 viii 8 Page D. Source for Back Issues of the 102 Monitor . 159 E. Summary of 102 Statements Filed with the CEQ through 11/30/71 160 F. Environmental Impact Statements: Federal Agency Contacts 163 G. Selected References 165 H. Conference Participants 167 ix The Impact of the National Environmental Policy Act 1 NEPA: BUCKLE DOWN OR BUCKLE UNDER? Thomas L. Coodale Associate Professor University of Wisconsin-Green Bay Dr. S. Dillon Ripley of the Smithsonian Institution, in opening his testimony to the Senate's Interior and Insular Affairs Committee said: "Mr. Chairman, I'm greatly honored to be here and to be able to open my mouth in this fascinating colloquium on the environment, and assumedly environmental qual.ity, and I think that the joint committee shows prescient intuition in having these hearings in k- voom which is singly devoid of environment and which resembl,..s to me an Egyptian sarcophagus." Without being at all apologetic about our conference arrangements, the comment has rather wide-ranging applicability. Dr. Ripley is commenting on our insensitivity to our daily environment and our tolerance of environmental insults unthinkingly imposed on one another.We have, by his criteria, a long, long way to go if environmental quality is to be more than verbiage. Concern for environmental quality is at least as old as Christianity. Concerns expressed in the Bible have been expressed almost continually for hundreds of ycars. Unfortunately, however, the expressions have seldom been more than verbal. The spirit of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1970 is to translate those concerns into something more tangible than assurances that everything's fine. Clearly, everything is not fine; a realization that we have come upon late, but surely not too late. Until recent times, the costs of environmental misuse grew very gradually, but wcre accumulative. Until recently, it seemed possible to defer pay...ent. Until recently, the right to damage and degrade the environment was widely accepted and thus widely practiced. But the hour when lavish coaches turn to pumpkins comas to everyone. Fittingly, PresidLnt Nixon made signing NEPA his first official act of this decade.The act is something of a legislative landmark, but Ilh. all such landmarks, it is also something of an indictment. It is an indictment of our inability to change our ways of thinking and acting in a world confronted with drastic change in every other respect.